Liliane Meignen

Structural Characterization of Charcoal Exposed to High and Low pH: Implications for 14C Sample Preparation and Charcoal Preservation

Chemical and structural similarities between poorly preserved charcoal and its contaminants, as well as low radiocarbon concentrations in old samples, complicate 14C age determinations. Here, we characterize 4 fossil charcoal samples from the late Middle Paleolithic and early Upper Paleolithic strata of Kebara Cave, Israel, with respect to the structural and chemical changes that occur when they are subjected to the acid-base-acid (ABA) treatment. Differential thermal analysis and TEM show that acid treatment disrupts the structure, whereas alkali treatment results in the reformation of molecular aggregates. The major changes are ascribed to the formation of salt bridges at high pH and the disruption of the graphite-like crystallites at low pH. Weight losses during the treatments are consistently greater for older samples, implying that they are less well preserved. Based on the changes observed in vitro due to pH fluctuations, various methods for removing contamination, as well as a mechanism for preferential preservation of charcoal in nature, are proposed.

Middle Paleolithic Settlement Patterns in the Levant

Drawing on a variety of lithic and faunal data from Hayonim, Kebara, Amud, and other well-documented sites in the Levant and adjacent areas, as well as information on numbers of sites, intensity of occupations, and internal structure of occupations, this paper explores broad changes in the nature of settlement patterns over the roughly 200,000 years of the Levantine Middle Paleolithic. The most readily visible differences between the early and late Mousterian are about numbers of people on the landscape—rates and timing of visitation and, perhaps, the sizes of the social groups present. From the point of view of site structure, we see substantive contrasts between Hayonim and Kebara caves and the successive phases of the Mousterian that they represent. Hayonim seems to be characterized by redundant, spot-specific use of domestic space, whereas Kebara displays a more rigidly partitioned and persistent spatial pattern, probably in response to higher rates of debris generation and more frequent visitation. Convincing indications of more people in the later Mousterian appear as two spatial aspects of the

Diversity of Lithic Production Systems During the Middle Paleolithic in France

The technological approaches developed in Western Europe during the last two decades aim to define different systems of debitage (used here as a noun to denote the process of producing blanks). For the Middle Paleolithic, the best documented are the Levallois debitage system, the laminar production system, the discoidal debitage system, and the Quina debitage system. Their geographical and chronological distributions show some general trends: a greater diversity of the production systems coexisting within the same region (especially in Southwestern France) at the end of the Middle Paleolithic; an increased use of the systems characterized by a low degree of blank predetermination (Quina and discoidal systems, Levallois recurrent centripetal method), and the emergence of a flexible, multifunctional toolkit with a high curation potential. These changes can be attributed to groups with different technical traditions who kept their own fundamental technical identity but who also adopted similar mobility patterns during the unstable climatic period at the end of the Middle Paleolithic, resulting in shared forms of socioeconomic behavior (frequent population moves and increased residential mobility).

Hayonim Cave Lithic Assemblages in the Context of the Near Eastern Middle Paleolithic

The Near East, as a geographical corridor between Africa and Europe, and as a region where both archaic and anatomically modern human remains associated with Middle Paleolithic industries were uncovered, is an area of crucial importance in the discussion of the origins of modern humans. In 1982, an interdisciplinary research project was initiated in order to establish the chronology of this period, acquire greater knowledge of the subsistence strategies, and gain a better understanding of the technical behavior of Mousterian populations living in this region (Bar-Yosef et al. 1992). This international research program began with the study of two cave sites (Qafzeh and Kebara) which are known for their human remains (Homo sapiens sapiens and Homo sapiens neanderthalensis respectively) and the associated Mousterian lithic and faunal assemblages (Boutié 1989; Bar-Yosef et al. 1992; Bar-Yosef and Vandermeersch 1992; Meignen and Bar-Yosef 1992; Speth and Tchernov 1995). At the same time, dating by members of the project and others placed the Kebara and Qafzeh sequences within the period of 48 to 100 ka and even confirmed that the long duration of the Middle Paleolithic, as already known in Western Europe, is valid for the Near East (Valladas et al. 1987; Schwarcz et al. 1988; Valladas et al. 1988; Schwarcz et al. 1989; Mercier et al. 1993; Mercier and Valladas 1994; Mercier et al. 1995). In the context of this research, Hayonim Cave (Figure 1) was chosen to provide new data concerning human behavior and past technical knowledge over a period that corresponds to the early Middle Paleolithic. Previous excavations at this site directed by BarYosef, Arensburg, and Tchernov (Arensburg et al. 1990; Bar-Yosef 1991; Tchernov 1992) exposed an important Mousterian sequence that, on the basis of both preliminary biostrati-

Together in the field: interdisciplinary work in Kebara and Hayonim caves (Israel)

The authors present an example of close field collaboration among prehistorians and researchers from different disciplines (particularly the geosciences), within the context of a long program of interdisciplinary research at the caves of Kebara and Hayonim (Israel). We outline the benefits brought about by the presence of different specialists being in the field during the excavation over long periods. Specifically, daily collaboration in the field during the excavation brings about: (1) A consensus of choice of strategic areas to excavate, either at the beginning of the project or during successive field campaigns, while taking into account the needs and goals of different specialists and their needs in taking samples; (2) A meeting of different points of view with many discussions of stratigraphy and site formation processes, which in caves are quite complex; (3) A unification of specialized vocabulary and jargon specific to each discipline by constant interaction in the field, which in turn facilitates communication among specialists; (4) A positive didactic element in training doctoral students in the field. This interdisciplinary strategy is more or less widespread now, but it was not the case in the early 1980s, and actual integration of results from the sciences (particularly the geosciences) came about only fairly recently. Without doubt, the awareness of the importance of such interdisciplinary archaeological data for discussing archaeological issues has ultimately paved the way for active interdisciplinary collaboration sprouting from the fieldwork, and has led to the generation of more robust and accurate interpretations.